Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Finally! (Score 0) 467

by afxgrin (#47492713) Attached to: World Health Organization Calls For Decriminalization of Drug Use

" If you want to understand what removing legalization would result in, I recommend that you read "Diary of a Drug Fiend" by Aliestar Crowley."

You could also experiment with drugs yourself. Why read someone's opinion when you could just go and form your own.

Personally the injection route always made me a bit uneasy. It's probably the cleanest way to use these substances however, except for the poking a vein repeatedly part. All you need to do is form some sort of embolism by injecting regularly and you risk dying not even from the drug itself.

Crime

World Health Organization Calls For Decriminalization of Drug Use 467

Posted by Soulskill
from the WHO-already-dismissed-by-old-people-as-being-a-bunch-of-potheads dept.
An anonymous reader writes: We've known for a while: the War on Drugs isn't working. Scientists, journalists, economists, and politicians have all argued against continuing the expensive and ineffective fight. Now, the World Health Organization has said flat out that nations should work to decriminalize the use of drugs. The recommendations came as part of a report released this month focusing on the prevention and treatment of HIV. "The WHO's unambiguous recommendation is clearly grounded in concerns for public health and human rights. Whilst the call is made in the context of the policy response to HIV specifically, it clearly has broader ramifications, specifically including drug use other than injecting. In the report, the WHO says: 'Countries should work toward developing policies and laws that decriminalize injection and other use of drugs and, thereby, reduce incarceration. ...Countries should ban compulsory treatment for people who use and/or inject drugs." The bottom line is that the criminalization of drug use comes with substantial costs, while providing no substantial benefit.

Comment: Re:There's also the price... (Score 1) 448

by afxgrin (#47306403) Attached to: $500k "Energy-Harvesting" Kickstarter Scam Unfolding Right Now

Broadband rectifying antennas aren't anything new really, sure the background RF from towers, other sources is quite significant, and most experts would point out that you can't power a bluetooth chipset on a few microwatts of harvested power - but you could use it to charge a capacitor and periodically power the chipset. An update every 30 seconds instead of continuous monitoring of an item still works for me. The only problem with making the tag so small is you don't have much space to make an antenna for longer wavelengths.

Comment: Re:Bad move (Score 3, Informative) 280

Well this Mike Hopkins guy is mostly comparing neutron yields from the D-T reaction LPP were testing with. Lerner inevitably wants to use the p-B reaction which produces no neutrons (aside from residual gas sources), however to test his pinch device using D-T is much easier as the fusion temperature is lower. It also makes for a good comparison to other pinch devices. Since the p-B reaction yields mostly photons they seek to make a fusion device from the charged particles (a stream of electrons and ions) and the photon energy collected via photoelectric current. Some of those gammas are uncapturable but the energy still captured is supposedly a net gain once they can get a high enough plasma temperature.

Engineering the Photon Capture Sphere Thing (PCST) to capture photons and electrons while not activating all the material with a 100-year half-life used in its construction, nor having it rip itself apart from dissimilar metals and thermal gradients, not having an unacceptably high rate of particles sputter the crap out of inside, is all non-trivial and would require significant trial-and-error builds. This is of course assuming they manage to make a working p-B reaction with their pinch. Best of luck to Lerner, but I'm not counting on seeing any significant results unless some billionaire type takes a risk on him.

Technology

How Cochlear Implants Are Being Blamed For Killing Deaf Culture 510

Posted by samzenpus
from the let-the-flamewar-begin dept.
First time accepted submitter Maddie Kahn (3542515) writes "Deaf culture has its own language, its own social norms, its own art forms, its own theater. But it's under threat. Why? Because most parents of deaf children now choose to use technology to help their kids hear. This piece explores why a revolutionary technology stands accused of killing a culture."
Math

P vs. NP Problem Linked To the Quantum Nature of the Universe 199

Posted by Soulskill
from the schrodingers-cat-is-both-alive-and-equal-to-NP dept.
KentuckyFC writes: "One of the greatest mysteries in science is why we don't see quantum effects on the macroscopic scale; why Schrodinger's famous cat cannot be both alive and dead at the same time. Now one theorist says the answer is because P is NOT equal to NP. Here's the thinking: The equation that describes the state of any quantum object is called Schrodinger's equation. Physicists have always thought it can be used to describe everything in the universe, even large objects, and perhaps the universe itself. But the new idea is that this requires an additional assumption — that an efficient algorithm exists to solve the equation for complex macroscopic systems. But is this true? The new approach involves showing that the problem of solving Schrodinger's equation is NP-hard. So if macroscopic superpositions exist, there must be an algorithm that can solve this NP-hard problem quickly and efficiently. And because all NP-hard problems are mathematically equivalent, this algorithm must also be capable of solving all other NP-hard problems too, such as the traveling salesman problem. In other words, NP-hard problems are equivalent to the class of much easier problems called P. Or P=NP. But here's the thing: computational complexity theorists have good reason to think that P is not equal to NP (although they haven't yet proven it). If they're right, then macroscopic superpositions cannot exist, which explains why we do not (and cannot) observe them in the real world. Voila!"

Comment: Re:A lense cover (Score 1) 363

by afxgrin (#46563303) Attached to: Google Tries To Defuse Glass "Myths"

Google Glass as an assistive device for the legally blind would fit a similar role. Especially with facial recognition enabled and audio feedback to the wearer, and just disable the display or make it a big block of colour output for people who are still 'blind' but can see a bit of light.

I imagine they would need two so they could obtain enough spatial information to aide in navigation.

However, I would feel bad for the legally blind to be assaulted for wearing Google Glass.

"I prefer rogues to imbeciles, because they sometimes take a rest." -- Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Working...